Available online at www.sciencedirect.com
Procedia Social and Behavioral Sciences
Procedia Social and Behavioral Sciences 15 (2011) 3596–3601 Available online at www.sciencedirect.com
Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences 00 (2011) 000–000 Procedia Social and Behavioral Sciences 15 (2011) 3596–3601
www.elsevier.com/locate/procedia
WCES-2011
The relationship between coaches leadership styles & player satisfaction in women skate championship Gilda Khalaj a *, Mohamad Khabiri b . Nasrollah Sajjadi c M.A Student of Sport Management, International University of Tehran, Tehran, Iran Associated Professor, University of Tehran, Tehran, Iran Associated Professor, University of Tehran, Tehran, Iran
Abstract The propose of study is to examine the Relationship Between Coaches Leadership Styles & Player Satisfaction in Women Skate Championship and for subordinate purpose is to organize the Coaches Leadership Styles & Player Satisfaction in Teams. From a total of 157 questionnaires distributed, 101 questionnaires returned by using the Friedman test, Kolmogrof - Smirnof (KS) and Spearman correlation coefficient were analyzed. Results arising from the study showed that the coach’s style of training and instruction is more and democratic leadership style is less. Also there was positive correction between training and instruction, social support, positive feedback and autocratic leadership style with all types of athletic satisfaction (Į 0.01). © 2011 Published by Elsevier Ltd. Open access under CC BY-NC-ND license. Keywords: Leadership Style, Player Satisfaction, Skate
1. Introduction It is appear that coach's role is the most difficult and troublesome role among all roles of a person in a sport like player, coach, manager, technical team or referee. Some believe that Therefore, they are expected to lead complicated sport programs with worthiness and train Athlete with technical competence in an atmosphere with high pressure. Coaches that they do not consider appropriate time in their works and activities or have no correct plan, often become involved in a difficulty (Lis, 2001). In case of coaching position and its specifications some various and different subjects have been presented by authorities and different Psychological Books has a section about this attractive and difficult profession. Martens (2004) in Successful Coach Book says: Coaching is an occupation different from other occupations in the society and the coach is expected to give gentle and good persons to the society. This occupation is an expectation and difficult job and needs different skills. Athletes are considered as main profiting persons of Physical Education departments and also main providers of its related entertainments and amusements. So, their satisfaction and occupation in sport is main responsibility of physical education managers. In addition, Sportsmen /sportswomen's satisfaction should be part of sport programs evaluation (Chelladurai, 2008). Separated discussion around Athlete's satisfaction arisen for tow specific cases. At first, Athletes are first profiting persons of university sports. In fact, reason of existence of theses sports are Athlete university student. Second, 1877–0428 © 2011 Published by Elsevier Ltd. doi:10.1016/j.sbspro.2011.04.341 Gilda Khalaj. Tel.: +989123355331 E-mail address:
[email protected] 1877–0428 © 2011 Published by Elsevier Ltd. Open access under CC BY-NC-ND license. doi:10.1016/j.sbspro.2011.04.341
Gilda Gilda Khalaj Khalaj et et al. al. // Procedia Procedia Social Social and and Behavioral Behavioral Sciences Sciences 15 15 (2011) (2011) 3596–3601 3596–3601 Gilda Khalaj / Procedia – Social and Behavioral Sciences 00 (2011) 000–000
3597 3597
when university sports are considered as an entertainment and amusement, Athletes are first producers of these amusements (Chelladurai, 2008). In the field of coaches' behavior in sport teams, Chelladurai (1990) announced sport multidimensional model; according to this model coaches' behavior is influenced by three main factors, circumstance properties (like team condition), leader and members' particulars that coaches' behavior finally influences success, function, satisfaction and even group versatility (Hosseini & et al., 2008). Jorehnush mentioned that four prior points of satisfaction dimensions from the viewpoint of Athlete are satisfaction of coach's behavior and cooperation, satisfaction of coach's personal participation and coach’s strategy (Ramezaninejad & et al., 2010). Khooran & et al. (2008) reported a positive relation between leadership behaviors realized by Athlete (exercise and training, democratic behavior, social support and positive feedback) with Athlete's satisfaction, but they did not observed a meaningful relation between leader's despotic behaviors and all satisfaction indexes (Khooran & et al., 2008). Undoubtedly, having leadership skills is one of salient particulars of an effective and successful coach and if using leadership scales by coaches are compatible with players' different functions; it encourages Athlete surely. Also, knowledge of coaches about satisfaction of team players can clear one of team psychological and management dimensions. According to different theories, one of satisfaction dimensions is related to type of coach's behavior, ethics, training and function. Type of coach's behavior and ethics may influence Athlete's satisfaction; therefore, one of important factors in coaching is gaining Athlete's satisfaction (Maghsoudi, 2009). Some limited researches have been collected in Iran for determining relation between coaching behaviors and Athlete's satisfaction. In this research, in addition to comparison of coaches' leadership styles, relation between coaches' leadership scales and Athlete's satisfaction and answer of this question that "Whether there is relation between coaches' leadership scales and Athlete's satisfaction?" has been studied. 2. Method Present research is applied from viewpoint of purpose and is descriptive (type of correlation) from viewpoint of collection, which is performed as field research. 3 questionnaires were used in this research for collecting information. (1) Demography specifications and properties (ascertained), (2) Leadership Scale Questionnaire LSS (Chelladurai & Saleh, 1980) with Kronbakh Alpha r=0.75 and (3) Athlete's Satisfaction Questionnaire ASQ (Riemer & Chelladurai, 1998) with Kronbakh Alpha r=0.78. SPSS instruments have been applied in this research for statistical computations. Statistical society in this research includes all athletes of teams participated in National Championship Women Skate Competitions in the year 2009, in the amount of 157 persons. Because of limitation of statistical society, sample is considered same as society. 101 questionnaires of 110 distributed questionnaires are applicable in statistical analysis methods. Freidman Tests (for prioritizing leadership scales), Colmogrouf – Smirnoff Test (for testing normality of data distribution) and Spearman Correlation Coefficient Test (for studying on relation of two unmoral variables) were used for analyzing research findings. All research hypothesizes are analyzed in P 0.01 level. Conclusions of research consist of, Coaches' Leadership Scales of Skate Teams participated in National Championship Women Competitions are Training and Instruction, Positive Feedback, social support, Autocratic Behavior and Democratic and there is positive and meaningful relation between all of them and satisfaction dimensions, except democratic leadership scale. 3.Findings Descriptive findings for tested cases are according to age and number of their participations in National Team.
3598 3598
Gilda Khalaj et al. / Procedia Social and Behavioral Sciences 15 (2011) 3596–3601 Gilda Khalaj et al. / Procedia Social and Behavioral Sciences 15 (2011) 3596–3601 Gilda Khalaj / Procedia – Social and Behavioral Sciences 00 (2011) 000–000 Table 1: Athletes' Statistical Description Age
Abundance
Percent of Abundance
Membership Record of National Team
Abundance
Percent of Abundance
Younger than 15 15-20 years old
19 55
18.8 54.5
Juveniles Youth
6 17
5.9 16.8
21-25 years old 26-30 years old
21 3
20.8 3.0
Adults No record
18 57
17.8 56.4
Total
101
100
101
100
--
As mentioned in Table 1; 18.8% of Athletes are younger than 15 years old, 54.5% 15-20 years old, 20.8% are 21-25 years old, 3% are 26-30 years old, and record of playing in National Team, 5.6% in Juveniles, 16.8% in Youth, 17.8% in Adults Team and 56.4% has no record in this field. Table 2 mentions that by using Freidman Test, exercising educational scale with Rank average of 3.94 in First Rank, positive feedback scale with Rank average of 3.030 in Second Rank, social support scale with Rank average of 2.96 in Third Rank, Imperious scale with Rank average of 2.60 in Fourth Rank and Democratic scale with Rank average of 2.20 is in Fifth Rank. Table 2: Priority of Coaches' Leadership Scales Leadership Scale Training and Instruction Democratic Autocratic Behavior Social Support Positive Feedback
Rank Average 3.94 2.20 2.60 2.96 3.30
4.5
3.94
4 3.3
3.5
2.96
3 2.5
Rank 1 5 4 3 2
2.6 2.2
2 1.5 1 0.5 0 Democratic Behavior (DB)
Autocratic Behavior (AB)
Social Support Positive Feedback Training and (SS) (PF) Instruction (TI)
Figure 1: Leadership Scales according to Ranking (more to less)
3
3599
Gilda Khalaj et al. / Procedia Social and Behavioral Sciences 15 (2011) 3596–3601 Gilda Khalaj / Procedia Social and and Behavioral Behavioral Sciences Sciences 15 00 (2011) (2011) 3596–3601 000–000 Gilda Khalaj et al. / Procedia– Social
3599
According to Spearman Correlation Coefficient for determining relation between Coaches’ Leadership Scale and Athlete's Satisfaction, there is positive and meaningful relation between Training and Instruction, Autocratic Behavior, social support and positive feedback leadership scales with all satisfaction dimensions, but only there is no meaningful relation between democratic leadership scales with all satisfaction dimensions. Table 3: Spearman Correlation Coefficients for Determining Relation between Leadership Scales and Satisfaction Dimensions Leadership Scales / Satisfaction Dimensions Team Performance Satisfaction (TP) Individual Performance Satisfaction (IP) Training and Instruction Satisfaction (T & I) Personal Treatment Satisfaction (PT)
Training and Instruction (TI)
Democratic Behavior (DB)
Autocratic Behavior (AB)
Social Support (SS)
Positive Feedback (PF)
0.518 *
0.043
0.486 *
0.453 *
0.510 *
0.676 *
0.058
0.544 *
0.596 *
0.626 *
0.635 *
- 0.056
0.430 *
0.438 *
0.444 *
0.575 *
- 0.031
0.370 *
0.341 *
0.396 *
* = relation is meaningful in level of Į = 0.01.
4.Conclusion Conclusion of first hypothesis in this research shows that there is no positive and meaningful relation between democratic scale and personal function and behavior and a negative and meaningless relation observed between democratic scale and satisfaction with education and exercise and also satisfaction with personal function. These findings are conformed to findings of Khooran & et al. (2008), Cakioglu (2003), Busobhan (2004), Vilani & et al. (2005), Aoyagi & et al. (2008) that believed positive relation and also these findings are not confirmed to findings of Wang (2006) and Nazarudin & et al. (2009). Reasons of this inconformity can be difference between statistical society sex, circumstance and cultural specifications and field of sport and leads to dissatisfaction of athletes. Enshel (2006) dictates circumstances and method of working with group members, a Coach should contemplate some standards like nationality, type of sport, age, sex and ability before determining her/his leadership scale. According to finding of Wang (2006), there is positive relation between all leadership scales wit all items of athletes' satisfaction. In addition, present research is conformed to findings of Li Ki Yan & et al. (2007). Vilani & et al. (2005) and Aoyagi & et al. (2008) believed to meaningful relation between all leadership scales (except Imperious scale) with athletes' satisfaction and these conclusions are conformed to 3 parameters of positive feedback, educational - exercising and social support scales with athletes' satisfaction but not conformed to 2 another parameters of Autocratic Behavior and athletes' satisfaction. Perhaps difference of statistical society sport field, statistical samples age, teams' competition level, cultural and racial particulars are reasons of this inconformity. Sadegh (2008) expressed that athletes are more worried about coach's knowledge and science than making personal communications, but younger athletes needs more sympatric support. Social support of coach makes effort step more pleasurable and makes it free from any kind of personal collision and positive feedback behavior leads to create equality feeling between members. Chelladurai (2008) expressed that positive feedback behavior guarantees justly distribution of coach's personal bonuses (it means same bonus for same function). From the viewpoint of Chelladurai and Riemer (1997) athlete's satisfaction is positive effective state that is concluded from one complicated transformation in structure and conclusions related to athlete's experiences. According to Japanese viewpoint about satisfaction issue, is it is a stable concept: 1Attracting satisfaction should be stipulated as first purpose of leadership (coaching). 2Satisfaction strategy should be stipulated more important than close relation. 3Amount of satisfaction should be evaluated regularly and systematically. 4Achieving to satisfaction should be flowed and continued by leader (Maghsoudi, 2009). According to viewpoint of Fidler, any scale of leadership can be effective if it is conformed to that condition. If all members of a team realize and accept stages for achieving to purpose clearly; so, there is many agreement between
3600 3600
Gilda Khalaj et al. / Procedia Social and Behavioral Sciences 15 (2011) 3596–3601 Gilda Khalaj et al. / Procedia Social and Behavioral Sciences 15 (2011) 3596–3601 Gilda Khalaj / Procedia – Social and Behavioral Sciences 00 (2011) 000–000
leader, member and condition. However, there is appropriate base for a coach; a dictator coach can be effective. Maghsoudi expressed in 2009 that relation between coach and athlete is an important factor in team and athlete's success and satisfaction. As result, leadership scale is related to followers' status and relation and respect between coach and athlete leads to athlete's satisfaction and performance improvement. Also analysis of research findings shows that from the viewpoint of athletes, coaches of participated teams in National Championship Women Skate competitions use educational – exercising scale more than other scales. Conclusion of researchers performed by Moradi & et al. (2006), Hosseini Keshtan & et al. (2008), Mohammad Panahi (2008), Tahami (2009) and Alferman (2005) are conformed to present conclusions. Hiogaard and & et al. (2008) also believed that Football coaches use positive feedback scale that is not conformed to present research. Maghsoudi (2009) expressed that coaches used participatory – justifiable scale. Inconformity of conclusions was difference of coaches' age and type of sport. Farhangi (2008) believed that leader presents a kind of a behavior that is appropriate with preparation of followers for performing works. Also, conclusions show that from the viewpoint of athletes, coaches use democratic scale lesser in National Skate competitions. It means that athletes have little participation in making decisions related purposes determination. Conclusions of researches of Mohammad Panahi (2008), Ghahfarokhi & et al. (2008), Tahami (2009), Sherman (1996) and Alferman (2005) are conformed to the present conclusions, but Moradi & et al. (2006), Hosseini Keshtan & et al. (2008) mentioned in their researches that coaches use imperious scale less and Li Ki Yan & et al. (2007) reported that coaches use educational - exercising scale less; Hiogaard and & et al. (2008) reported that coaches use social support scale less that is nor conformed to present research. Reasons of this inconformity are difference between coaches' age and type of sport and also different cultural states. Because a leader should be able to conform the leadership for preparing followers. Farhangi (2005) expressed that no one of leadership scale is the best for all circumstances. Perhaps, strange point in the present research with previous researches is not specified direction in satisfaction athletes in different fields of sport. Nazarudin (2009) expressed that coaching effective behavior passed from special records direction, as changing of athlete's particulars and status. As a result, sport records, coach's particulars and athlete determine leadership scale. For achieving to improvements for performing sport, it is necessary that each coach behaves in a way that is accepted by athlete. Perhaps another reason of inconformity of these conclusions is difference of sport field and also teams' competition level. Because this is of one of the first researches for studying on relation between coaches' leadership scales and athletes' satisfaction, it seems better and precise justice needs more researches in sport different levels. References Alferman D., Lee M. J., & Wurth S., (2005), Perceived Leadership Behavior and Motivational Climate as Antecedent of Adolescent Athletes’ Skill Development, The online Journal of Sport Psychology Andrew D., (2004), THE EFFECT OF CONGRUENCE OF LEADERSHIP BEHAVIORS ON MOTIVATION, COMMITMENT, AND SATISFACTION OF COLLEGE TENNIS PLAYERS, Doctor of Philosophy These, http:// www.google.com/ advance research/ leadership Aoyagi, M. W., Cox, R. H., and McGuire, R. T., (2008), Organizational citizenship Behavior in Sport: Relation ships with Leadership, team Cohesion, and athlete Satisfaction, Journal of applied sport psychology, 20: 25-41 Caligula Asli, 2003, Leadership and Satisfaction in Soccer Examination of Congruence and players Position, Senior These, http://www.google.com/ advance search/ leadership Chelladurai, P., (2006), human Resource Management in Sport and Recreation, 2rd ed human kinetics Chelladurai. Pakinatan (2008). "Management of Human Resources in Sport and Health Entertainments" – translated by Mehdi Talebpour and Samad Avalbazri - Publication Center of Ferdowsi University of Mashhad.
5
Gilda Gilda Khalaj Khalaj et et al. al. // Procedia Procedia Social Social and and Behavioral Behavioral Sciences Sciences 15 15 (2011) (2011) 3596–3601 3596–3601 Gilda Khalaj / Procedia – Social and Behavioral Sciences 00 (2011) 000–000
3601 3601
Dexerter, Davis J., (2002), An Analysis of the perceived leadership Styles as levels of satisfaction of selected Junior College Athletic Directors and Head Coaches, The Sport Journal, Vol. 5, Iss. 2 Hiogaard, R., Gareth, W. J., & Peters D. M., (2008), Preferred Coach Leadership Beheavior in Elite Soccer in Relation to Success and Failure, International Journal of Sport Science & Coaching, Volume 3, number 2, 241-250 Hosseini Keshtan. Misagh, Ramezaninejad. Rahim, Banar. Nooshin, Mohades. Fatemeh (2008). "Relation of Coaches' Behavior with Group Correlation and Team Success", article of speech at 1 st National Specialized Congress of Sport Management
Jackson. Rajer, Palmer. Richard (2003). "Sport Management Guidebook" – translated by Abbasali Gaeini – Publication Center of Olympic National Committee Khooran. Hadi, Khabiri. Mohamamd and Ehsani. Sheida (2008). "Relation between Coaches' Different Behaviors from the Viewpoints of Athletes and level of athlete's Satisfaction". Poster at 1st National Congress of Sport Management emphasized on 20-year old document of Islamic Republic of Iran, Olympic and Paralympics National Academy. Lis Lari M (2001). "Sport Management" – translated by Hashem Koozehchian, Danesh Amuz Publication Center. Martens. Reiner (2008). "Successful Coach" – translated by Reza Soheili, Mashhad, Publication Center of Astan Ghods Razavi. Mohammad Panahi. Payam (2008). relation between Coaches' Leadership Scales and group Correlation of the State Volleyball League Teams". Master's Thesis – University of Tehran, Faculty of Physical Education & Sport Sciences Moradi. Mohammadreza. Koozehchian. Hashem, Ehsani. Mohammad, Jafari. Akram (2006). "Relation between Coaches' Leadership Scales and Athletes' Group Correlation in the State League Clubs Basketball Teams", Harkat Publication Center. No. 29, page 5-16. Maghsoudi. Abdolmajid (2009). " Relation between Leadership Scales and Wrestlers' Expression and Satisfaction in Mazandaran Province", Master's Thesis, Physical Education – Allameh Tabatabaei University, Faculty of Psychology & Educational Sciences. Nazarudin, M. N.,(2009)ˬ Coaching leadership Styles and athlete Satisfaction Among Malaysian University Basketball Team, Research journal of international studies-issue 9, PP.4-11 Ramezaninejad. Rahim, Hematinejad. Mehrali, Banar. Nooshin, Falah. Marieh (2010). Relation between power methods of coaches and Women Athlete's Satisfaction in Mazandaran Province. Olympic Publication Center. No. 18, page 45-55. Rimer H.A. , & Toon, K. (2001), Leadership And Satisfaction in Tennis: Examination of congruence, gender and ability. Research Quarterly for exercise and sport, vol.72, 243-256 Tahami. Gelareh (2009). relation between leadership scale and power source of State Volleyball League Teams Coaches from the viewpoint of athletes. Master's Thesis – University of Tehran, Faculty of Physical Education & Sport Sciences Vilani, L. H. P. and Samulski, D. M., (2005), Situational Leadership Ȇ and the Coach-Athlete Relationship in Brazilian Table Tennis, Sport Science Research, vol. 26, Numb. 3, PP. 31-36 Wang, Yhan – Sheng. (2006), "The Relationship between coaching leadership behaviors and Taiwanese collegiate tackwondo competifors satisfaction", University of Incornate word, www.google.com/leadership and Satisfaction
